"INCONCEIVABLE!"

Iron Man 2

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Tue, 18 May 2010 04:12:00 +0000

Iron Man had a “super” summer in 2008. There plenty of good super hero sequels but there are just as many terrible ones. Can Iron Man 2 rock like the first or will it go the way of many other super hero sequels?

About this Movie:

Iron Man 2 takes place shortly after the ending of the first movie. Congress and the U.S. Military does not approve of Tony Stark having the only access to the Iron Man armor. The son of a former business partner of Tony’s father seeks revenge for his father being deported and dying in Russia. A competitor of Stark Enterprise wants to knock Tony off his pedestal. If that was not enough, Nick Fury and S.H.I.E.L.D has an interest in Iron Man.

What I liked about this Movie:

Robert Downey Jr. is a great Tony Stark/Iron Man. This was the role that Downey was born to play. I am sure that Downey pulls this off because he has had many of the same vices which Tony has such as excessive drinking, womanizing, and ego mania. Downey makes this movie.

I love the writing of Stark and how he handled all of his challenges. The birthday party with the armor was perfect for Tony. The scene with Tony hung over and sitting in the doughnut was perfect.

I also love all the main characters and their portrayal in this movie. Samuel L Jackson is a fantastic Nick Fury and brings Fury’s attitude right to the screen even though Fury is a white guy in the comics. Don Cheadle does a good job as Rhodey/War Machine. Scarlett Johansson was not only sizzling as the Black Widow but brought Natasha’s character alive on the screen. Gwenyth continued to be great as Peppers. Mickey Rourke was great bad guy in Whiplash. The cast was great.

This was a fun superhero action movie. There is a ton of action and fun. The ending fight with Iron Man and War Machine taking on all the robots was a blast to watch.

What I did not Like:

There was not much I did not like about this movie. They replaced some of the more intelligent writing and plot of the first movie with more action and special effects. Don’t get me wrong, this movie was well written but did not meet the bar of the first one.

My Review:

Iron Man 2 was a solid sequel. It was fun and lots of action. It does fall into the standard issue with action movie sequel- need more action and explosions than the first movie. The writing was not as strong but it was not bad.

If you liked the first Iron Man, then I fully recommend seeing this movie.

My Grade: B+

Other Reviews

IMDB : 7.5 out of 10

Rotten Tomatoes: Critics Review: 74%-- Fresh- 6.5 out of 10

Rotten Tomatoes: Community Review: 88%-- Fresh- 7.6 out of 10

Roger Ebert: 3 out of 4 stars

E!: A-

Movie Review: Transformers II: Revenge of the Fallen

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 16:25:00 +0000

The 2007 movie Transformers was a huge surprise. I expected the first Transformers to be lame. Instead it was a great action movie with a decent plot and character development. I was extremely hopeful that Transformers II: Revenge of the Fallen would be as good as the first one.

About this Movie:

Transformers II takes place a year after the first movie. Sam is heading off to college. Optimus Prime has formed an alliance with the American Army to hunt down Decepticons. The Decepticons have a plan to bring back the “Fallen”, the original Decepticon, and Sam holds the key.

What I liked about this Movie:

I love fighting robots especially ones which can transform. I have always loved the concept of Transformers. Watching them on the big screen is still a lot of fun. This move is packed with action and fighting scenes. It is truly a popcorn movie that you can lose yourself in.

Megan Fox is almost reason enough to watch this movie. Megan is drop dead gorgeous and I would watch her knit for three hours.

What I did not Like:

The plot was microscopic thin in this movie. The first movie was well written and had a decent plot. Often sequels miss the importance of the plot of the original movie, that made it a great summer movie. This movie clearly missed the point.

The college scene was out of place. This is a movie that young boys want to see because transforming robots are cool. The focus on the college party scene did not really fit in. Even though the scenes with Sam’s mother being high from eating the pot brownies is very funny, it was not in good taste nor friendly for the young ones. The tasteless jokes reminded me of a Porkys or an American Pie movie.

I don’t remember any Transformers that could change into human forms. I sure do not remember any that can change into hot college babes that become Species like Terminators. I was confused which movie I was watching.

I really did not understand the oldest Transformer on Earth. Firstly, he can transform into a stealth bomber and he is an ancient Transformer? I guess you can argue that Bumblebee demonstrated that they can scan other vehicles and then transform into them from the first movie but this was a strange pick for the oldest Transformer. Secondly, how did he get the ability to teleport himself and others and why don’t other Transformers have this ability?

My Review:

I really enjoyed the action of this movie but it failed grab my imagination like the first one did. It was a typical bad plot sequel. You need to see it on the big screen for the action scenes but I would not pay full price to watch it again. Check it out as an afternoon matinee or wait for it to come to the cheap theaters.

My Grade: C+

Other Reviews

IMDB : 6.5 out of 10

Rotten Tomatoes: Critics Review: 20%-- Rotten- 3.9 out of 10

Rotten Tomatoes: Community Review: 68%-- Fresh- 6.7 out of 10

Roger Ebert: 1 out of 4 stars

Slash Films: 3 out of 10 Stars

New York Times: 2.5 out of 5 Stars

Alternative Ending for Terminator Salvation

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 03:47:00 +0000

EW.com recently broke the ending that we did not see and will not see with Terminator: Salvation. I honestly could see this ending working with this movie. The ending the studio went with was fairly predictable but allowed for this series to have more sequels. Check it out.

"There was talk on the Internet about an alternate ending where Connor dies and they take Connor's likeness and put it on top of Marcus Wright's machine body. So that it's actually a machine that's leading the resistance! And the Internet caught wind of that and people went, 'That's bulls---! We don't want that!'" (EW.com)

McG grins. "Well, that's not really what the ending was." (EW.com)

Actually, the bloggers were on the right track. Except, McG adds, the original ending actually went even further. (EW.com)

"Connor dies, okay? He's dead," McG continues. "And Marcus offers his physical body, so Connor's exterior is put on top of his machine body. It looks like Connor, but it's really Marcus underneath. And all of the characters we care about (Kyle Reese, Connor's wife Kate, etc.) are brought into the room to see him and they think it's Connor. And Connor gets up and then there's a small flicker of red in his eyes and he shoots Kate, he shoots Kyle, he shoots everybody in the room. Fade to black. End of movie. Skynet wins. F--- you!" (EW.com)

This ending would have been a huge twist and would have blown my mind. It would have bummed me out that the machines would have won.

Movie Review: Terminator: Salvation

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 02:28:00 +0000

The Terminator series is in a common situation for movies like that of the Alien , Spiderman, and X-Men movie series. The first movie was phenomenally different. The second movie was superior to the first and blew our socks off. Then the third movie was a huge disappointment. Now the Terminator series tries to bounce back with their fourth installment, Terminator: Salvation.

About this Movie:

This movie is set in the future after Judgment Day which occurs in 2018. Skynet has successfully destroyed much of the human race. The machines are in charge and gathering up what people they can find. There is an organized resistance movement which John Conner is involved. This movie tells the story of John Conner’s connection with the resistance, a new terminator, and how John meets Reece, his father.

What I liked about this Movie:

This movie was action packed from the moment it started. It was not just mindless action but rather driven by the plot of the movie. The story was decent but predictable.

All of the special effects were fantastic and beautiful, except for one. It was seamless with the rest of the movie.

I have been waiting to see life post Judgment Day since the concept was introduced in 1984’s first Terminator Movie. I love the gritty, dirty, post apocalyptic world of the Terminator. The scenes in LA destruction were very cool.

What I did not Like:

The plot was a bit predictable but not bad. It did not throw us for any loops or surprises.

There is a scene where Arnold’s face is superimposed over the body of another actor as a terminator unit. It does not last long but it was very hokey. Thankfully the face is burned away in a short period of time.

My Review:

I enjoyed this movie inside and out. I found it to be a fun ride that set up future movies. This popcorn movie was a blast of energy and cool special effects. It brought the Terminator movie series back to where it needed to be and allowed me to forget the

There was a possible alternate ending that would have made this movie mega cool but also a huge bummer in the end. (Click here to read about it).

My Grade: B+

Other Reviews
IMDB User Rating: 7.3 out of 10
Rotten Tomatoes Critics: 33% - Rotten Movie (average 5.1 out of 10)
Rotten Tomatoes Critics: 71% - Rotten Movie (average 6.7 out of 10)
Rebecca Murray: B+
Movies Online: Michael: 8 out of 10 Stars
Roger Ebert: 2 out of 4 Stars
Slice of Sci Fi: 2 out of 5 stars:

Movie Review: Star Trek

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 01:23:00 +0000

I was introduced to Star Trek in the late 70’s when of local television station would show the re-runs after school. I had already grown to love Science Fiction with Star Wars. Star Trek was a completely different animal that Star Wars but I developed quite a fond appreciation for the series.

I began my movie watching with The Wrath of Khan and I was hooked from that time on. I am glad that I missed Star Trek the Motion Picture until much later or I might have given up on this series after the first movie. I still can not stay awake during that borefest.

About this Movie:

Star Trek is a rebooting of the whole franchise as only J.J. Abrams could deliver. There are new actors playing these beloved characters. A frequent Trek plot devise of time travel changes the entire Star Trek universe and the life of our beloved James Kirk. This allows Abrams to make changes to the characters and their history without causing massive rioting with Trek fanatics. This fun reboot causes the Trek universe to be much darker and grittier than the original series portrayed.

What I liked about this Movie:

I loved the concept of changing the universe from its roots with this movie and time travel. It was a smart use of an already accepted practice in the Trek –verse (see Voyage Home and First Contact). This worked for the plot and for most of the fans.

Spock, Bones, and Scotty came to life on the screen. Zachary Quinto (Sylar from Heroes) not only looked like a younger Spock but had his mannerisms and delivery down. I was amazed at his ability to make me think he was a younger Nimoy without thinking of Sylar. He portrayed the internal struggles of Spock between his Vulcan and human sides.

Karl Urban did a great job of becoming Doctor Leonard ‘Bones’ McCoy. He brought the dry wit and fiery personality that DeForest Kelley made famous. He was the emotionally driven doctor that balances out the logic induced intellect of Spock.

I simply loved Scotty in this movie. Simon Pegg gets to be Montgomery “Scotty” Scott before he becomes the genius engineer of the Enterprise. When we first meet Scotty, he is in exile because his theories are not accepted by Star Fleet but he takes over engineering before the end of the movie.

The plot of a Star Trek movie is never it’s strong suit but some Trek movies have better plots than others. This movie fits in that category. It was well written but still contains several plot holes. But it is nothing that can not be overlooked.

This was a stunningly beautiful movie. The scenery is great while on Earth and in outerspace. The special effects were top notch. This movie had all the visual appeal that you would expect from a summer popcorn movie and more.

What I did not Like:

There were only two minor things that I did not like about this movie. There were times that I did not believe that Chris Pine was Kirk. I know that his character changed more that any other but at times I saw the actor and not the character.

Anton Yelchin laid the Russian accent on a bit thick for Chekov.

My Review:
I loved this movie. This was the best Star Trek since Wrath of Kahn. J.J. Abrams hit this out of the park and he is not a Trek fan.

My Grade: A

Other Reviews
IMDB User Rating: 8.4 out of 10
Rotten Tomatoes Critics: 95% - Fresh Movie (average 8.1 out of 10)
Rebecca Murray: A
Movies Online: 8 out of 10 Stars
Roger Ebert: 2 out of 4 Stars
Real Movie News- average rating: 5 out of 5 stars:

Movie Review: X-Men Origins: Wolverine

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 01:08:00 +0000

My good friend John Paul introduced me to the X-Men in the early 1980’s while we were in middle school. I was already an avid comic book fan that read Amazing Spider-man, New Teen Titans, Legion of Superheroes, and the Justice League. I instantly fell in love with the great characters in X-Men. The mysterious wild man, Wolverine, was the cornerstone of those fabulous heroes.

The first X-Men movie renewed my faith that comic books could be made into good adaptations. The second X-Men movie exceeded my expectations and told a good story while introducing us to some of the better known X-Men characters. My hopes were dashed with the third movie when they tried to combine two of the best known X-Men stories but not they were not faithful enough to either story and focused on special effects instead of smart writing. My hope with X-Men Origins: Wolverine was that this movie could turn the X-Men brand of movies back to pre X-3 but my expectations were for a suckfest of a movie. Yet I paid my $10 to see X-Men Origins: Wolverine on opening night.

About this Movie:

X-Men Origins: Wolverine begins with Logan, Wolverine, as a small child that is sickly in 1840. We quickly learn about family issues that cause young Logan discover his powers and to run off with his older half brother. Both of the boys are blessed with healing factors that allow them to age extremely slowly after adulthood. The boys find that they are tailor made for war with their feral instincts and healing abilities through out the decades of their life. After some time, Logan leaves the life of violence and war for the life of a lumberjack. After tragedy in Logan’s life, he finds his way back to the life of violence and revenge which subjected him to experimentation that gave him the adamantium laced skeleton and claws. The just of the movie is a simple plot of a man that wants to live his life out in peace after he discovers the horrible things he is capable of but is thrust back into a life of violence for revenge.

What I liked about this Movie:

I really like Hugh Jackman as Logan. After three X-Men movies, he has the character and mannerisms of Wolverine. I can not imagine anyone else playing this role.

This movie did a fairly good job of telling the origin to the mysterious Wolverine. Even though some of the details were changed, I believe it gave enough background for most casual X-Men followers to have a better understanding of the character and his motivation. It also explained Logan’s memory loss that plagued him for years in the comics and for three movies.

This movie was a fun movie to start off the summer popcorn movie watching. There was a lot of action and special effects while yet still having a plot and some character development. This movie will not cause you to contemplate the meaning of life but it will entertain you if you go in expecting a typical comic book movie.

What I did not Like:

This movie tried to introduce too many other characters. They brought in other X-Men characters such as Cyclops, Gambit, Emma Frost, the Blog, and many more. There was no time to explore any of these characters. It was pointless to introduce these characters and then essentially ignore most of them. Comic book movies often fail when they introduce too many bad guys but never develop them (Batman and Robin, Spiderman 3, and many more examples) but this movie had a similar problem with introducing to many super characters in general. This movie needed to stick with Wolverine, Sabertooth, Sliverfox, and Stryker.

I had a problem with Gambit and most things about him in this movie. Firstly, where was his Cajun accent? After the fantastic X-Men cartoon of the 90’s, it is hard not to expect a thick Cajun accent but it did not exist in this movie. The core of Gambit is rouge and a thief that becomes a reluctant hero but I really did not get that feel from this character at all.

Don’t even get me started on my issues with the character of Wade Wilson/ Deadpool character.

It is hard to love this Wolverine movie when we have been exposed to great superhero movies over the last year with Iron Man, The Dark Knight, and Watchmen. With the greatness of those movies in our minds, it is hard to lay down the hopes that this movie would completely rock. It did not rock but it was good for a superhero movie.

My Review:

I liked this movie and will probably buy it on DVD but I did not love it as I had hoped. But it was not as bad as I feared it might be. It was a fun movie that was worth my money but not one that I will treasure for ever. It is a must see in the movie theatre for the action sequences.

My Grade: B

Other Reviews
IMDB User Rating: 6.8 out of 10
Rotten Tomatoes Critics: 36% - Rotten Movie (average 5.1 out of 10)
Rotten Tomatoes Community:64% Fresh (average 6.3 out of 10)
Rebecca Murray: B-
Movies Online: Michael: 8 out of 10 Stars
Roger Ebert: 2 Stars out of 4
Real Movie News: 3.0 Stars out of 5.0

Watchmen Movie Review

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 22:01:00 +0000

I read this graphic novel, Watchmen, in 1986. I have hoped this story would eventually make the silver screen since that moment in time. It would have been impossible a decade ago to create a movie which would require the level of CGI to bring forth the vision of Moore to the screen. I went in with humongous expectations for this film and I was not disappointed.

About this Movie:

The Watchmen Movie is based on the popular graphic novel (comic book) miniseries from the mid 1980’s by Alan Moore. This comic defined the term graphic novel with its graphic portrayal of an alternate universe where superheroes existed and had been outlawed in the 1970’s. The life of caped vigilante is shown to be a dirty and morally off center life for many of the characters. This story was revolutionary for the comic book genre and how fans looked at their heroes.

This is not a movie for the kids. It is rated R for a reason. It has intense violence, gore, nudity (male and female nudity), adult language, and a rape scene. It is not your average comic book movie.

What I liked about this Movie:

I believe this movie stuck to the heart of Moore’s story. At 2 hours and 45 minutes, it could not add in every detail from the comic but it did bring the soul of the story to life. Unlike some other comicbook adaptations, this movie stuck to the plot and often the very tiny details rather than just borrowing general concepts and character names only.

The cinematography was beautiful and picturesque of the comic book panels. It was amazingly accurate on the details of the scenes. I dropped my jaw numerous times it was perfect on the important panels. Some of these panels were the breaking of glass when the Comedian is thrown out of the window, Nite Owl wiping his glasses, and the clock on Mars.

The casting of Rorschach was nailed. The actor that portrayed Rorschach not only had the look and feel of Rorschach but also had the voice and delivery of the lines. His every changing inkblot mask was freaky and cool at the same time. In the comic, Rorschach wore lifts to compensate for his short stature. This was not directly discussed in the film but you could visually see the height difference between character in disguise and without the mask in prison.

The cast in general was great. I really believed these actors were the characters from the book.

I loved the presentation of the 80's. It was like a trip back in time. I remember the heaviness of the nuclear race and how intense negations were to lower the stock piles. They used the popular culture of the 80's with MTV and politicians and commentators (such as Pat Buchanan) to bring in the illusion. This movie used music from the 70's and 80's very effectively. All of this helped produce the feel of the big decade on the screen.

This movie was two hours and forty five minutes long but it did not drag on at all. Every moment of the film was enjoyable from the beginning to the very end of the film. I felt like I got my money’s worth even with paying for full price tickets.

What I did not Like:

There was not much that I disliked about this movie. I could nitpick about how they left out this detail or that detail. I could complain about the changing of the big ending. But really I can not complain about those things because this movie made it work.

My Review:

I loved this movie. It was a great presentation of this wonderful but disturbing comic. It is gritty and grimy but that is the nature of the Watchmen. As a fan of the comic, there were times where I knew they were missing a scene but I am hopeful it will be on the extended edition of the movie when it comes to DVD. The scenes that were missing were not essential to the plot of the story.

My Grade: A

Other Reviews
IMDB User Rating: 8.3 out of 10.0
Rotten Tomatoes Critics: 65% Fresh (average 6.3 out of 10)
Rotten Tomatoes Community: 73% Fresh (average 7.4 out of 10)
Roger Ebert: 2 Thumbs up/ 4 Stars
Real Movie News: 4.0 Stars out of 5.0

Soccer Mom- Review

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 23:50:00 +0000

My daughter bought the movie Soccer Mom with some of her Christmas money. She really desired to see this movie because it stars Emily Osment, who plays Lilly Truscott on Hannah Montana. I reluctantly agreed to watch it with my daughter even though this movie did not appeal to me and soccer bores me.

About this Movie:

A soccer team of 14 year old girls can not win a game. Their coach is transferred to another city for his job. He tells the girls that he knows the world famous soccer great Lorenzo Vincenzo and he has agreed to be their coach.

Becca's father was her soccer coach before he died. She had intended to quit the team with her old coach, before the announcement that Vincenzo would be the new coach, but is now excited about playing again. Arrangements are made for Becca's mother, Wendy, to greet the new coach and bring him to meet the girls. Come to find out, Vincenzo only told their old coach that he would coach the girls to get rid of the nuisance of a coach. Wendy decides to dress up and masquerade as Vincenzo so Becca will not be disappointed again.

This movie is a combination of The Bad News Bears, Mrs. Doubtfire, and Just One of the Guys.

What I liked about this Movie:

This movie does teach great life lessons about practicing and believing in yourself. It does so without being overly preachy or self righteous. This movie did not take itself too serious and it does have some funny scenes with the mom trying to be a guy.

Overall the characters were likable in this movie. The acting was alright for a movie geared to pre-teens. My seven year old daughter gave this movie a thumb up.

What I did not Like:

This movie was produced by the Ladies Home Journal but they appeared to copy the plot of several old Disney movies. This was simply a retread of better movies like The Bad News Bears and Little Giants. They even borrowed the Disney standard of using a one parent home (Why does every Disney live action movie have to have a dead parent?)

It does have a scene where Wendy, who is dressed as Vincenzo is kissed by one of the other girl's mother. There is also a discussion of how her friend is not gay even though she had assumed he was because he is a hair dresser. This movie could cause discussions that families may not be prepared to discuss.

I did mention that this movie was about soccer? right? SNOOZE!

My Review:

This movie was better than I thought it would be. I went in with really low expectations and it was better than I projected. I did not fall asleep or want to pop my eyeballs out with a spoon (like with High School Musical series). Now it was not good but it was not horrible.

My Grade: C-
My Daughter's Grade: B+

Here is what other reviews have to say:

IMDB User Rating: 5.0 out of 10.0
Common Sense Review: 3 out 5 stars
Tribune (Texas Newspaper): 2 Thumbs UP
Real Movie News: 3.5 Stars out of 5.0
Film Bug: 4 stars out of 5.0

Movie Review: The Dark Knight

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 02:37:00 +0000

About this Movie: (Beware: spoilers are included in this review)

This movie starts off very dark and becomes extremely dark. It is not a kid’s movie by any means. It is an intense psychological look at our heroes and villains and pushes them past their limits. When you think you hit the top of the intensity and the twisted perspective, it bumps up to another level. It is an unreal rush.

Batman and Lt. Gordon have been cleaning up the streets. They are putting the screws to organized crime in Gotham City. New District Attorney Harvey Dent joins in to help the fight. Organized crime begins to use one of their Hong Kong Counterparts to laundry their money. Batman retrieves him from his compound in Hong Kong. This allows the Joker, a minor player in Gotham until till now, to swoop in and start his reign of terror.

I will not give away any more of the plot.

What I liked about this Movie:

This is the pentacle of the character of the Joker. I loved Jack as the Joker in Batman (1989) but Heath Ledger takes to the extreme. This demonstrates why the Joker is Batman's greatest enemy. His crimes are not about logic or greed but his twisted mind. The Joker was 4 steps ahead of everyone for the entire movie. The entertainment buzz about Ledger being nominated for an Oscar is not an exaggeration. This will be the first comicbook movie to win an Oscar for acting.

Christian Bale portrayed both Bruce Wayne and Batman perfectly. He was able to show the complexity of both characters and what was driving both of them. He demonstrated the shell that both Bruce and Batman have to keep. I loved the relationship with previous love interest Rachel Dawes.

Aaron Eckhart captures the character of Harvey Dent. This is great acting. He will be overshadowed by Ledger's performance but do not miss it. This is the real Harvey/Two Face character (sorry Tommy Lee Jones but Aaron was 100 times better).

I really liked Gary Oldman as James Gordon in Batman Begins. He did a great job as a young Gordon. In this movie, he solidifies his role. He becomes the James Gordon that we love in the comics.

This movie reminded me of the best Joker stories I have ever read including Death in the Family and the Killing Joke. The plot and writing is fabulous. The filming of this movie was wonderful. The special effects were really good but they are not the main focus of this movie.

What I did not Like:

Nothing! Plain and simple, there was not a thing that I did not like about this movie.

My Review:
Best movie of the year and one of the best I have ever seen. This movie is what a Batman movie was meant to be. This movie is not just for Comicbook fans. It is a must see.

My Grade: A+

Here is what other reviews have to say:

IMDB User Rating: 9.7 out of 10
Rotten Tomatoes Critics:94% Fresh
Rolling Stones: 31/2 Stars out of 4
E Online: A
Roger Ebert: 4 Stars

Indiana Jones IV Review

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Sat, 31 May 2008 18:08:00 +0000

After a twenty year absence, Indiana Jones hit the big screen last week. I went with a group of friends to take in the adventure. Here is my review.

About this Movie: (Beware: spoilers are included in this review)
Indy is now twenty years older in the late 1950's. McCarthyism is at an all time high. The cold war is raging against the Soviets. Instead of the Nazi's trying to steal relics for power, the Soviets have bought into this game. They are after the crystal skull. This skull is not the typical religious symbol but rather something out of this world. In the process of chasing the skull, Indy joins up with a young protégé and a familiar face from the past.

What I liked about this Movie:
Indy is back. Indiana Jones is one of the greatest action series of all time. It is great to have another movie in this saga. It is nice to see the Fedora and whip back in action.

There were some great action sequences in this movie that are very typical for an Indy movie. The motorcycle chase scene is a lot of fun especially in the library. There is the car chase and skull exchange in the jungle that reminds me of the truck chase scene in Raiders. There is plenty of action in this movie.

Indy movies are known for their various creatures. There are snakes in Raiders, Spiders and bugs in Temple, and rats in Last Crusade. This movie has mammoth killer ants that know how to swarm. It is very cool.

I liked Shia LaBeouf as Mutt Williams in this movie. I loved how he arrived on a motorcycle dressed as Marlon Brando from the Wild One. It was no secret that he was Indy and Marion's love child but it played very well in the movie. They left it where he could take over for Indy on adventures in the future. In the end, Indy even calls him Junior when is a nice tribute back to Last Crusade.

Overall the affects in this movie are very good. The CGI is flawless in certain scenes. Effects have come a long ways over the last 20 years.

There are other fun geeky things in this movie. There is the return of one of Indy's previous love interests. There is the glimpse of the Ark of the Covenant in the Warehouse. Indy says the famous line from Star Wars (not "May the Force Be with You") that Harrison stated 30 years ago "I've got a bad feeling about this". I did applaud when this line slipped out of his mouth.

What I did not Like:
Some of the scenes were very similar to other movies of this genre such as the Mummy series and National Treasure. The ants were cool but reminded me of the scarabs from the Mummy. It appeared that they had trouble finding things that were real fresh for this movie.

This movie had a different feel than the other three. I think part of it is the setting in the late 50's. I did not like the Soviets as villains nearly as much as Nazis. I understand that Harrison is 20 years older so you have to make Indy older and this worked for the time frame but it just felt weird.

The CGI for the Prairie Dogs was bad. They reminded me of the gopher from Caddy Shack. They seemed completely pointless and out of place in this movie.

The atomic explosion scene seemed like filler to me. The fake people in a fake town was kind of fun but was not relevant. Indy jumping into a lead lined refrigerator right before the explosion and is blown clear of the site was completely unbelievable.

What bothered me most about this movie were the aliens. In the first 10 minutes we are introduced to aliens being the center of the story. I was confused if I was watching an Indy movie or the new X-Files movie. After the Inter-dimensional spaceship left, I half expected Indy to call Marion "Scully".

My Review:
I wanted to love this movie but I did not. But I did really like this movie. It was a fun popcorn movie. It was great to have Indy back. It had a similar feel to Star Wars Episode I for me. It is great to have a fabulous franchise back but the movie did not live up to the original trilogy. That being said, I enjoyed myself and found it worth the price of admission.

My Grade: B-

Here is what other reviews have to say:

IMDB User Rating: 7.3 out of 10
Rotten Tomatoes Fans: 64% Fresh
Rotten Tomatoes Critics: 78% Fresh
Rolling Stones: 2.5 Stars out of 4
E Online: A
Roger Ebert: 3.5 Stars out of 4

I am Iron Man

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Mon, 05 May 2008 02:37:00 +0000

The summer blockbuster movie season has started. As usual, the month of May dishes out the fun and money making movies that will get no nod at the Oscars for acting. But as a fanboy, the summer movie season is a blast. Iron Man is the first to rocket onto the big screen for this summer.

About this Movie:
This movie sticks fairly close to the comicbook series. Tony Stark, ( Robert Downey Jr.), is the rich and famous owner of Stark Industries, which is a big weapon's manufacturer. He is taken by terrorists and forced to create a weapon. Instead he built his first Iron Man suit, powered by a device to keep him alive. His armor continues to evolve and change during the movie with some very humorous moments in the process. In the end, he fights against another version of his armor which is worn by one of the bad guys.

What I liked about this Movie:
It was complete gambit of a popcorn summer movie. It had a lot of action and appropriately placed humorous moments. It was very visually appealing with great special affects. It had a great story that stuck very close to the comicbook.

This was a great comicbook adoption. In the last 10 years, the comic industry has developed a lot of good to great adoptions of comicbook characters and stories, which I have enjoyed. But they have also had as just as many misses like the Punisher, Daredevil, and Hulk. Iron Man is the first group and it is one of the best. It is up there with Spiderman 1 and X-Men 1.

The cast is wonderful. The acting was really good for a popcorn movie. Downey pulled off the drunken rich guy (not a stretch for Downey) with no issues. Gwyneth Paltrow was a great Pepper Potts. The other actors are perfect fits for their roles.

What I did not Like:
In this movie, Jarvis is not the attentive butler but rather a computer system that runs Stark's home and the Iron Man armor. I also felt that his big "reveal" at the end of the movie should have waited for a sequel. Those minor details are the only things I could really complain about in this movie.

My Review:
This is a "super" movie that I fully recommend. It is fun and full of action and great special affects. The crowd laughed and cheered often during this movie.

It is rated PG13. It did seem appropriate for some children under the age of 13. I would recommend parents viewing it before letting their children go. It is much tamer than other PG 13 movies like Cloverfield.

Look for the great Stan Lee in this movie as a Hugh Hefner like character. (Not as funny as his role in FF2 but still very funny)

By the way, stay through the credits. Comic fans will love the implications of the post credit special appearance.

My Grade: A-

Here is what other reviews have to say:

Rotten Tomatoes Fans: 94% Fresh
Rotten Tomatoes Critics: 91% Fresh
Rolling Stones: 3.5 out 4 Stars
E Online: B+

Also check out: Strange Culture: 5 Reasons you will enjoy Iron Man

Cloverfield Review

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 00:22:00 +0000

I finally was able to watch the highly anticipated Cloverfield this afternoon. I have been salivating at the previews and online hype. I love most everything that J.J. Abrams and Bad Robot Productions touches.

About this Movie:
Cloverfield is a thrill ride extreme. As with any roller coaster, if you have high blood pressure, are pregnant, have back or neck problems, get motion sick or a queasy stomach, then you will want to pass on this movie. Ok, you may not have to pass if you are pregnant or back problems but you will feel like you spent 3 hours on roller coaster and the movie is only an hour and a half long.

It is filmed from the perspective of a group of friends in New York's Manhattan when a monster attacks the city and all Hades breaks loose. One of the friends has a video camera because he was taping the goodbye party. It is similar to the Blair Witch Project with the whole movie from a hand held camera. One of the guys that viewed this movie with me has to leave an hour in because of the camera motion.

Cloverfield is a monster movie on steroids. I can not even describe the creature because it is so bizarre. You have to see it to fully understand this terrifying monster. It also has spawn that are as bad as the main monster. Together they terrorize New York far beyond what Godzilla and children ever could.

What I liked about this Movie:
This is not your stereotypical monster movie. It develops characters and plot. You unfortunately become attached to some of characters along the way. This is a benefit of shooting the movie from the innocent bystander's point of view. My friend Bryan pointed out how shocking it is that this method of story telling for a monster movie has not been used previously.

The special effects were very special. Even as twisted and bizarre that the creature is, it looked like it belonged. There was realism to the monster and the way it acted and moved.

When the creature first attacks the city and destroys a skyscraper, there is a dust storm that hits the streets. It was just like happened on 9-11-01 when the towers went down. They attempted to keep a level of realism all the way through this movie and were fairly successful.

This movie had a similar feel to the movie Alien. The movie Alien was the first to successfully mix the Sci-Fi and Horror genre. Cloverfield mixes the Monster Movie genre with Horror with success. There are moments that reminded me of Alien but in a limited way.

There were some very funny moments in this movie. Hud, the friend that is video taping, has some great lines. Hud is very socially inept and insecure. He talks when he should just be quiet. The conversation in the subway tunnel was great. I know guys just like Hud.

This movie was very different than anything I have ever seen.

What I did not Like:
The camera motion at times was too much. I had to hold my head during some of the scenes when they are running down the street. Anyone with any motion sickness issues will have problems with the some of the scenes.

My Review:
This movie was excellent. I was a bit numb after it was over because it was so intense. The crowd was totally silent as the movie ended. No one was talking or clapping or booing. Most people just sat there through as the credits began. It appeared to have the same affect on all of us. We were mesmerized and in shock.

This movie produced everything I was hoping from this movie. It is truly the monster movie of the ages.

By the way, stay through the credits.

My Grade: A

Here is what other reviews have to say:
IMDB User Rating: 8.1/10
Rotten Tomatoes: 76% Fresh
Roger Ebert: 3 Stars
Rolling Stones: 2 1/2 stars out of 4
E Online: B+

LInks for Cloverfield movie

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 01:17:00 +0000

Here are Links for the mysterious movie without a title from J.J. Abrams and Bad Robot Production known as Cloverfield,1-18-08, and Slusho. Please leave me a comment if I have left any of them out.

The trailer (click her to view trailer)

Official Sites:

1-18-08.com

Slusho!

Blogs, websites, and forums

1.18.08 Blog

The 18th

Cloverfield Clues

1-18-08.livejournal.com

one-eighteen-oh-eight.blogspot.com

1-18-08pedia.com

11808clover.blogspot

cloverfield-movie.com

cloverfieldnews.com

cloverfieldparasite.blogspot

cloverfieldproject.com

jjabramsprojects.blogspot

kaliyugatheory.blogspot

monstrous-movie.blogspot

projectcloverfield.com

whatscloverfield.blogspot

Possible related sites
Slushozoom

www.rageofthegods.com

Possible Spoiler Links

SteakNBJ Forums

TRANSFORMERS

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Fri, 03 Aug 2007 16:29:00 +0000

Review by Fat Jack
My Rating: 3 stars out of 5
Rated PG-13

Rotten Tomatoes Critics: 57% Rotten
Rotten Tomatoes Users: 82% Fresh
Netflix: 4.3 stars out of 5
IMDb: 7.9 stars out of 10
Roger Ebert: 3 stars our of 4

I was a big fan of the Transformers as a kid. I collected the toys (and I still have many of them) and watched the cartoons. I was go for the experience and had fun, but I was not overly impressed. I was disappointed in the editing. Director Michael Bay utilized a very quick and jumpy camera. He cut away too soon in the action sequences and I thought he zoomed in too much. It made for exciting action scenes, but there were times when it was hard to see what was going on. I suspect that was to hide mistakes. It was fun while it lasted, but it was a forgettable action flick.

Mikaela: [speaking of Bumblebee] Why, if he's supposed to be like this super-advanced robot, does he transform back into this piece of crap Camaro?
Sam: Oh, see, no. That doesn't work. [Bumblebee turns around and speeds away.] Great. Now... see? Fantastic. Now you pissed him off! That car is sensitive. I mean, $4,000 just drove off!

THE SIMPSONS MOVIE

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Fri, 03 Aug 2007 16:25:00 +0000

Review by Fat Jack

My Rating: 4 stars out of 5
Rated PG-13

Rotten Tomatoes Critics: 89% Fresh
Rotten Tomatoes Users: 91% Fresh
Netflix: 4.3 stars out of 5
IMDb: 8.4 stars out of 10
Roger Ebert: 3 stars our of 4

I think most people expected THE SIMPSONS to suck, or at least to be nothing more than a feature length episode. Who knew that it would be so good? This flick bares all (including Bart’s doodle) and makes for a surprisingly fun time. Woo hoo!

Todd Flanders: I wish I had a dad like Homer.
Ned Flanders: Well I wish you didn't have the devil’s curly hair.

Marge: [to Lisa] Great. But the very best thing is that he listens to you. Because nothing means more than for a man to... [looks up in surprise].
Marge: How did the pig tracks get on the ceiling?
Homer: [singing Tune to Spider-Man Theme Song] Spider-Pig, Spider-Pig. / Does whatever a Spider-Pig does. / Can he swing / from a web? / No he can't / cause he's a pig. / Look out! / He is the Spider-Pig!

FANTASTIC FOUR: RISE OF THE SILVER SURFER

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Sun, 17 Jun 2007 14:10:00 +0000

Review by Fat Jack
My Rating: 4 stars out of 5
Rated PG

Rotten Tomatoes Critics: 39% Rotten
Rotten Tomatoes Users: 60% Fresh
Netflix: 4.3 stars out of 5
IMDb: No rating yet
Chicago Sun-Times: 2.5 stars our of 5

I was hesitant to see this after the vomit session that was the first FANTASTIC FOUR, but I heard decent things, some good things, and the trailer looked like fun. On a Father’s Day weekend when I get to choose the movie, I thought our little family would give it a chance. I had been reading comics all morning and was in the mood.

Popcorn movie – a great description of this movie. Where RISE OF THE SILVER SURFER differs from say, the last SPIDER-MAN movie is this: F4 does not take itself seriously. It is a comic book movie that knows it is a comic book movie. There are bits of silly humor, plot holes, and bits of preachy dialogue at the end. Whereas SPIDER-MAN seeks to be realized as a piece of movie art, F4 seeks to entertain and simply have fun. I know that going into and am more forgiving assuming the creators take themselves serious enough as to not stomp of their own film.

Besides, the bar was set so low in the first one, the creators would have to try hard to make SILVER SURFER worse.

So I was into it. It was fun and enjoyable. We three (me, wife and daughter) had a nice, light, fun Father’s Day at the movies.

Susan Storm: Guys, we have a problem. He’s here.
Reed Richards: Sue, get out of here!
Susan Storm: Why are you trying to destroy us?
Silver Surfer: I have no choice.
Susan Storm: There’s always a choice.
Silver Surfer: Not always.

30 Days of Night

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Fri, 15 Jun 2007 21:32:00 +0000

Another comic story turns to Hollywood for interpretation. The famed comic, 30 Days of Night, came out several years ago. I was lucky enough to all three comics when they hit. Great horror comic. Sam Raimi (I suspect you've heard of him) will produce the flick. It stars Josh Hartnett and Melissa George and is due out 19 October 2007. Diamond has the goods:

For those unfamiliar with 30 Days of Night, the story is set in the remote village of Barrow, Alaska, which is just about completely dark for an entire month every winter. After most of townsfolk head south for the winter, a group of vampires arrive and the Barrow's Sherriff (Hartnett) must stop them.

Click here for info from IMDb.
Click here for the trailer.

Blooker!!! Neigh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Fri, 15 Jun 2007 02:23:00 +0000

My brother in law (Fat Jack) talked me into posting my thoughts about movies in this inconceivable blog. Yes, I love watching movies, but don't get to see them as often as I would like. I also have a tendency to watch shows that are not part of the mainstream. Well here goes nothing.

Just watched an oldie but goodie last night with the kids. We watched "Young Frankenstein" and I think the kids enjoyed it. If you haven't ever seen YF or it's just been a while, do yourself a favor and rent it. It stars Gene Wilder, the late Marty Feldman, Madeline Kahn, the late Peter Boyle (as the monster), Cloris Leachman (Frau Blucher) and a voluptuous Teri Garr. Since it is written by Mel Brooks, it's a parody of the original version of Frankenstein. This is definitely a movie chalk full of funny movie quotes. "What knockers!" "Sedagive!!!!!!!" "You take the blonde and I'll take the one in the turbin!" "Could be worse, could be raining!!" It is rated PG and only has a couple of bad words so the kids could see it. It does have some adult themes (bedroom talk) but probably no more than your typical prime time sitcom nowadays.

I especially like the scene where the monster visits the blind man (cameo by Gene Hackman). Too funny watching the monster roll his eyes after the blind man crushes his cup after his toast. "Hey, where ya goin', I was gonna make expresso."

Well, I promised the Fat Jack I would sign up to post on the blog and I did. I am an accountant, not a writer, but I will try to embellish a little bit in future posts. Here are some movies I have seen lately and how I rate them out of 4 stars:

The Waitress - 31/2 (Adrienne Shelly's swan song, murdered last Nov.)
The Host - 3 (Korean seamonster started by those evil american scientists)
Babel - 31/2 (Heart wrenching, 6 degrees story of people desperately needing to be heard)
Away from Her - 31/2 (Excellent acting by Julie Christie on grim subject of alzheimer's)
Notes on a Scandal - 21/2 (Probably like better than rating, deducted 1/2 point for creepiness and wife hated it, although when I was a teenager it was cool to have an older actress seduce a teenage boy)
Little Children - 31/2 (Creepiness factor outweighed by former Bad News Bears pitcher reviving acting career and playing a pedophile)
Shrek 3 - 2 (Just okay, material has about run out, must see with the kids, though)
The Last Kiss - 21/2 (Zach Braff making some stupid impulsive decisions and having to beg for forgiveness for half the movie)
Pan's Labrynth - 4 (Masterpiece adult fairy tale, must watch again soon, perfect at the theater, also helped with the grim story line that the theater's heater wasn't working properly and the temperature was about 50 degrees.)
The Fountain 11/2 (A little too out there for most people, including myself. May have been better if movie was a little shorter, just seemed to drag.....on)

Spider-Man 3- One Fan's perspective

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Mon, 07 May 2007 13:13:00 +0000

Review by Larry Litle

I am a true blue Spider-Man fan. I have been reading Amazing Spider-Man since I was 5 years old. I love the Spidey Character and I love Peter Parker even more. Peter is a poor sap whose life has always been far worse than mine but he has always done what is the right thing, at least eventually.

I was very fearful when the first movie came out. I had seen Hollywood ruin great comic characters over and over again. I was hopeful that it would not suck but I had very low expectation. When I left the theatre after Spidey #1, I was very pleased. Yes, as a fan, I had trouble with some of the details like no "web-shooter" and the blurring of Mary Jane and Gwen Stacey but I loved the movie anyway. They always have to change something but it did not take away from the core of Spider-Man/ Peter Parker.

I did not have the looming fear with the second movie but I rather had high expectations and anticipation. I was well please with the second one but it also had some issues.

Spider-Man 3 brought back the fear and anxiety. I became anxious when it was announced that they were going to have 3 villains because I know how that worked for the tragic Batman and Robin (at least Spidey 3 did not have the cardboard cut out actor- George Clooney). Then I started reading reviews and critics of this film. It was being torn to shreds and made to sound like it would be Daredevil bad. As Spidey 3 is starting, I crossed my fingers and spoke out loud several times "Please don't suck."

So much for brief background information. Below is the real review. It does include spoilers so if you do not want to know, do not read until after you see this film. You have been warned.

What I liked:

I enjoyed Peter Parker. I loved that he is finally comfortable with his Spidey alter-ego. I liked how he started getting a little cocky about Spidey. Then his perfect world came crashing down and he had even more problems. Unlike my fellow reviewer, I even liked the crying. This is true the nature of Pete. I loved how his anger gets the better of him when dealing with information about Uncle Ben. I enjoyed the complexities of his relationship with Mary Jane. I savored the transformation to the dark Pete and then his redemption. Toby has become the complete Peter Parker.

Topher Grace was an amazing Eddie Brock. The story stuck very close to the comic with Eddie and how he becomes disgraced. His hatred for Peter which leads to the bonding with the symbiote was a wonderful tribute to the comics. The church scene of the bell ringing and Peter ripping of the symbiote was picture perfect. I thought the CGI of Venom was wonderful and brought to life this terrifying character.

The story to rap up the Harry Osborn arc was marvelous. The best friends turned arch-enemies story played very well on screen. I truly felt for Harry even when he was the Goblin. The transformation from enemies back to friends for a while then back to enemies and then back again was fabulous and true to the nature of the comics. The redemption of Harry and the Goblin was fulfilled in his death by his own glider (similar to his father’s death) while saving Pete and Mary Jane was the perfect ending even though I wanted him to live.

The Sandman was a complex bad guy with reasons for the crimes he was committing. This is true to his comic character. Sandman has been a villain by circumstance. For a while in the comics, he even turned to be a good guy. I like how they used his sick daughter to show the humanity of this villain. There were things about the Sandman that I did not like but I enjoyed his character over all.

Many people disliked Aunt May's role in this film. I felt that it demonstrated well the relationship between May and Pete. She is still a huge part of his conscience. Her reaction to Peter's news that the Sandman, who killed her beloved husband, was killed by Spiderman was perfect. She has always been the forced that helped Peter stay grounded in life. I thought it was brilliant to have her show up at his apartment because she is worried about him.

If you are going to introduce Gwen Stacey (see below) then it is wonderful to introduce Captain Stacey. Captain Stacey is one of my favorite old peripheral characters. I continued waited for them to kill him off by a piece of falling wall but I realized that they just introduced him. In the comics, Captain Stacey sacrifices himself to save a child from a piece of falling wall that Doc Ock knocks down while fighting Spider-Man.

The action sequences were sweet. I prized the action sequences with Spidey and the Sandman. The ending battle sequence with Sandman and Venom fighting Spidey and the (Good) Goblin was sensational. True to the comics, the Spidey sense can not detect Venom and that was shown nicely in this film. Venom killing the (good) Goblin with his own glider was a nice touch. I enjoyed the trapping of Venom and using sound against him to defeat him.

Update 5/9/2007 12:05:48 PM I also loved Bruce Campbell in this movie. He always has a minor role in these movie but this was clearly the best. He is a great "French Maître d" in this film. This was clearly the funniest parts of the movie. It was hysterical watching him bring the champagne and sending it back.

What I did not like:

I really liked the overall presentation of Sandman. I did not like how they made his fly in flying sand. Fat Jack's review of this is correct and right when simply stating that “sand does not fly”. I know it worked in the Mummy but the Mummy was controlling the wind with the sand. Sandman is not Storm of the X-Men and can not make sand fly.

Why is it in every final fight scene has to have Mary Jane's life in jeopardy? All three movies used her as bait. Why not lure Spidey out by having Sandman attack civilians. I do give props for them having a cool way to threaten her life with the web trap and the taxi.

There was not enough Venom. He is one of Spidey's worst enemies. The first several times Spidey faced him, Spidey also lost his life. He almost seemed like an after thought in this movie. I loved the build up to him but he did not do much. Also Venom would not have died by a Pumpkin bomb. If you were going to show the explosion, why not show him hanging off the edge of the building recovering. Venom needs to be the exclusive villain in Spidey 4, if they make one.

Talking about Sandman and Venom, I thought there were too many villains in this movie. I love all three villains but it would have been much better by leaving out either the Sandman or Venom. I believe you still could have had the redemption of Harry and had him die at the hands of either Venom or Sandman. What I would have loved to have seen was the story of the Black Suit and to have shown Venom at the end as a precursor of things to come like at the end of the Batman Begins. A show down with the Sandman at the end would have worked for that scenario.

I understand that the Spidey sense does not work when Venom is attacking and this was even joked about. What I do not understand is how both the Goblin and the Sandman can sneak up on Peter. Did the Spidey sense go on the fritz? It was almost non-existent in this movie.

Why does every movie have Spider-Man unmasked in multiple parts of the film? Until recently, Spider-Man's identity was one of the greatest secrets in the Marvel Universe. He would not stand on the top of a building with his mask off. He would not show up at Harry's with his mask off. He certainly would make his mask out of something that can take a blow or two so it does not rip in half like it has in every movie.

I did not like how they introduced Gwen Stacey. I hated how Peter used her to make Mary Jane jealous. The first movie blended these characters together and made it difficult to bring in the true nature of Gwen. Gwen was Peter’s first love that was pure and innocent. It is hard to bring that into a character that is being used by Pete.

Why would we mess with the killer of Uncle Ben? Yes this was a convenient way to make Peter become darker but it was wrong to mess with the story. It reminded me of Batman Forever trying to rehash the death of his parents. There is no good reason for it.

Final Thoughts: I really liked this movie. I know that some people are saying that it is too long. I felt it was about perfect in length. Others have stated that this was a chick flick/ crying movie in disguise. I also disagree. Peter and company are dealing with really issues in relationships and life. There may be no crying in baseball but there is in Spidey movies. I really liked but did not love this movie

My Grade: a Solid B

Other Grades:

Fat Jack's review: 2 out of 5

Netflix: 4.7 out of 5

IMDB: 7 out of 10

Rolling Stone: 3 out of 4

Rotten Tomatoes: 61% Fresh

E! Online: B

First Weekend Gross: 151.1 Million Dollars

Mini-Review: "Spider-Man 3"

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Sat, 05 May 2007 12:35:00 +0000

Review by Fat Jack
My Rating: 2 stars out of 5
Rated PG-13

Rotten Tomatoes: 61% Fresh
Netflix: 4.7 stars out of 5
IMDb: 7.9 stars out of 10

Spider-man 3 was not as bad as the critics make it out to be. It was a fun action movie and it had some cool moments. Some of the criticism was warranted. Here’s what I noticed:

There was entirely too much crying by everybody.
Sand cannot fly.
It was a bit too long.
There were too many villains.
What was up with the Uncle Ben reinvention?

Everyone had their crying moment in this film and some, like Peter Parker, cried through the whole thing. That really doesn’t bother me unless it is overused and this was overused. There are other ways to show pain and emotion besides crying. The water works were really flowing in this.

I do not care what kind of particle accelerating, neuralizing-what-you-call-it you put it in, sand cannot fly. Merge sand and man, and sand still cannot fly. It just can’t Why on God’s green earth Raimi thought it necessary to have Sandman turn into a cloud of particles and fly around the city is beyond me. What good could come of that except … and here it goes … you just want to have it look cool.

And now we know why Spider-Man 3 is getting poor reviews. Director Sam Raimi made the big no-no of comic book movies, the great failing of the genre. He focused on looking cool rather than being great. Whether pressure from the studio, or internal pressure to make the next one great, Raimi slipped and fell. Not all the way to the bottom mind you. This is an Oscar winner compared to other comic flicks like [shudder] Daredevil or Electra. But the pressure to one-up himself too its toll. The script was long, too long, and the characters were jumbled. Script not there. No problem. Add another villain or two and you can distract the audience with cool special effects. Oh, except that really doesn’t work.

Just in case all of that doesn’t work, then you can reinvent a character and his past. That will get them. Yeah, that gets them fighting mad. In a move of pure movie making genius, Raimi decided to change who killed Uncle Ben and work that whole thing into the Sandman plot. It sucked. Sucked big time. Hot steaming cup of sucked. Suck big donkey … okay I need to stop right there. [Breath] There was absolutely no sense in that. That is a big failing of fantasy and sci-fi writing. If you write yourself into a corner, rather than reworking the script and creating good writing, we just use magic to save the day or just make you think something happened one way when it really didn’t. Daytime soap operas employ this tactic all the time. That should tell you something.

The more I think about it, the longer I ponder these strikes, the more I dislike the movie. The madder I get. There was no sense in making these mistakes and someone of Raimi’s talent should have known better. Do these people not use editors? What the Hell?

For a flick it was fine. Plenty of action to keep things going. I liked what they did with Harry. Venom was fine, but they should have stopped there and made a movie around that. Would have been plenty for a good writer.

And by the way, does anyone really go to a church and ask God to kill someone for them? Do people really do that? I mean those people who do not have serious mental illnesses. That was about poor writing again. Seems I’m seeing a trend here. By the way, I really wanted to love this movie.

Mary Jane Watson: What's happened to you?
Peter Parker: I don't know... But I have to stop it.

[I wish someone had stopped this script a long time ago.]

Review: GRINDHOUSE

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Tue, 10 Apr 2007 02:54:00 +0000

Review by Fat Jack
My Rating: 5 stars out of 5
Karla Quotient: Avoid It

Now in Theaters
Rated R (very, very R)
Directed by: Robert Rodriguez and Quentin Tarantino

Rotten Tomatoes Critics: 82% fresh
Rotten Tomatoes Users: 90% fresh
Netflix: 4.4 stars out of 5
IMDb: 7.1 stars out of 10

This is a blood-soaked train ride that barrels down the River Styx at 200 miles per hour, and I loved every single second of it. The Rodriguez-Tarantino double feature pounds the ground from minute one with no less than flesh-eating zombies, powerhouse chicks who stomp skulls and save lives, guns, knives, blood and brains, and bad ass muscle cars. Movies do not get any better than that.

This is not for everyone. Don’t take your 10-year-old, no matter how cool or how mature. He’s not ready for it and even if he was, he shouldn’t be. This is not recommended for the likes of my sister, Karla, or grossfest thrill ride of incredible proportions. Be prepared for buckets of blood and ooze and smatterings of skull and laughs too.

Laughs you say? Yes, laughs. Maybe I shouldn’t laugh. Maybe I should be shocked and disgusted and disturbed. I did squirm a bit from time to time, and I enjoy that feeling as well. But I did laugh at parts where I think I was supposed to laugh. You may not. My friend, Brian, certainly will not. But I laughed during Tarantino’s PULP FICTION and KILL BILL. This brilliant director has this uncanny ability to bring humor to scenes that should not be funny and I tip my hat to that ability.

This is a double feature that starts with Rodriguez’s PLANET TERROR, which is a zombie flick. A good zombie flick as far as that goes – one of the best really. Then there are the fake trailers between the movies. Those are a hoot and they are directed by a host of different folks. You can get the skinny at IMDb. Afterwards, comes Tarantino’s flick, DEATH PROOF. Typical of Tarantino, this movie takes its time and develops the characters through brilliant dialogue. He doesn’t just rush into the action, but takes his time. I love that about Tarantino. In this case, we have a killer, a serial killer, whose weapon of choice is a death proof street rod.

One interesting tidbit is the actress, Zoe Bell, who plays herself in DEATH PROOF. The actor is a real-life stuntwoman who worked as the stuntwoman for Uma Thurman on the set of KILL BILL and the stuntwoman for XENA: WARRIOR PRINCESS. In DEATH PROOF, she plays herself, a stuntwoman, who is a thrill seeker. She certainly gets her wish dealing with the psycho serial killer played by Kurt Russell. My wife loved this character. Tarantino and Rodriguez did a great job with creating strong, powerful female characters. That is nothing new for Tarantino who is a pro at portraying different types of great women. That is one thing I love about him. As a side note, the stunts in DEATH PROOF were done with real cars and real stunt people. I understand that Zoe Bell did her own stunts. After you see he movie, you will understand why that is so cool. CGI? I think not.

No doubt about it: Another hit for Tarantino. Rodriguez’s movie is good too, but it is nothing compared to DEATH PROOF. My only criticism is that DEATH PROOF wasn’t long enough. That is, there was so much more that could have been done to that movie. I wanted more: more of the characters, more of the story, more of the dialogue. More. But how much more could he have done with a movie that was nearly 3.5 hours long as it was?

STUNTMAN MIKE: Do I frighten you?
ARLENE: [nods]
STUNTMAN MIKE: Is it my scar?
ARLENE: It's your car

DR. DAKOTA BLOCK: If anyone comes to the door, I want you to shoot them.
DR. BLOCK’S SON: What if it’s Dad?
DR. DAKOTA BLOCK: Especially if it’s your Dad.

STUNTMAN MIKE: There are few things fetching as a bruised ego on a beautiful angel.

Scene Stealers

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Wed, 04 Apr 2007 04:15:00 +0000

There is an interesting movie review site out there called Scene Stealers. Check them out and their unique rating system. I think you will find their reviews interesting.

Star Wars 30th Anniversary Quiz

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Tue, 03 Apr 2007 15:35:00 +0000

Calling all fellow Star Wars geeks. If you have not taken the Wizard Universe Star Wars 30th Anniversary Quiz, then here is your chance. Here is what Wizard Universe has to say about the Quiz, "From the best 'Star Wars' movie ever made to the hottest woman in the galaxy, Wizard Universe wants to know your opinions on the Star Wars Universe ". Let the Force guide you in your selections and you will not go wrong.

I would like to thank my friend KittyKat Jill (AKA Token Girl) for pointing me to this quiz.

Mini-Review: "High School Musical

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Sun, 01 Apr 2007 01:58:00 +0000

Review by Fat Jack
My Rating 4 stars out of 5
Now available on DVD
Rated G

Rotten Tomatoes: 60% fresh

Netflix: 3.8 stars out of 5
IMDb: 6.4 stars out of 10

Wondering why you want to see this teeny-bop Disney flick? Well you probably won’t unless you have a kid. If you have youngsters, then this is the GREASE for their generation and it’s sure to be remembered by them for years to come. Once you rent it, you will likely want to buy it, but be prepared for multiple viewings and lots of sing-alongs.

The DVD is especially nice as it has a karaoke feature where you can watch the DVD and when the musical portions come on, then the words play at the bottom of the screen: a perfect addition for the aspiring actor or actress in your household.

SHARPAY: “We need to save our show from people who don't know the difference between a Tony Award and Tony Hawk.”

Fat Jack's Summer Preview 07

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Tue, 27 Mar 2007 01:29:00 +0000

GRINDHOUSE
In Theaters: April 6, 2007
Rated R
You Must See the Trailer!

Cult fan favorites – Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez – bring what promises to be a bloody good time with GRINDHOUSE. Back from the days of yore when the old movie palaces hosted gruesome and grinding double features of sex and blood, these two directors bring us their version of the non-stop action. Each director presents a 60-minute feature back-to-back with fake trailers in between. Tarantino, a personal favorite of mine, brings us DEATH PROOF and Rodriguez directs PLANET TERROR in one explosive show.

These are meant to be exploitation, B-movies with lots of sex, violence and gore. That should be enough to warn you. Faint at heart and easily offended should steer clear. Those who are cool; however, will want to be sure to catch GRINDHOUSE in the theatre. Don’t wait for it to come out on DVD. I suspect these will be good enough, or bad enough depending on your point of view, to be a part of your personal DVD collection.

DEATH PROOF is a slasher movie with a car as the weapon of choice. PLANET TERROR takes place on an alien planet that is a nice parallel to our own. As the tagline states: “Welcome to the Grindhouse – It’ll tear you in two.”

PATHFINDER

In Theaters: April 20, 2007
Rated R
See the Trailer

From the Apple trailer site: “An action-adventure set in the time when Vikings tried to conquer North America, PATHFINDER tells the heroic story of a young Norse boy left behind after his clan shipwrecks on the Eastern shores. Despite his lineage, the boy is raised by the very Indians his kinsmen set out to destroy. Now, as the Vikings return to stage another barbaric raid on his village, the 25-year-old Norse warrior (Karl Urban) wages a personal war to stop the Vikings’ trail of death and destruction. Forging his own path, his destiny is revealed and his identity re-claimed.

This reminds me of the very cool, but a bit ridiculous Schwarzenegger movie PREDATOR. Based on the trailer, I think you are going to have to suspend your disbelief a lot to enjoy this film. Not necessarily a bad thing, but don’t get bogged down by historical inaccuracies or plausibility. This action-adventure movie is for fun.

JINDABYNE
In Theaters: April 27, 2007
Rated R
See the Trailer

From the Apple Trailers site: “On an annual fishing trip, in isolated high country, Stewart, Carl, Rocco and Billy (“the Kid”) find a girl’s body in the river. It’s too late in the day for them to hike back to the road and report their tragic find. The next morning, instead of making the long trek back, they spend the day fishing. Their decision to stay on at the river is a little mysterious - almost as if the place itself is exerting some kind of magic over them.”

SPIDER-MAN 3

In Theaters: May 2007
Not Yet Rated
See the Trailer

From IMDb: Peter Parker has finally found the balance he's longed for between his love for Mary Jane Watson and his responsibilities as Spider-Man. The city of New York and it's citizens are at last coming around and appreciating everything he has done as his crime-fighting alter ego, and Peter is in the running for a staff job at the Daily Bugle. However, everything Peter has worked for is about to unravel. Flint Marko, while fleeing prison, is caught in an accident that displaces molecules and is transformed into the Sandman, a new super villain who is able to change his body into any shape of sand he sees fit. When Peter learns of a connection between The Sandman and the murder of his uncle, Ben, he will stop at nothing as Spider-Man to capture him; but before Peter can do so he discovers a mysterious black substance has made his suit black, and has brought forth a darker side of Parker and Spidey nobody has seen before. He starts to abandon the ones he loves and forces his best friend Harry Osborn to take up his late father's mantle as The New Goblin. Peter now has to decide which life he wants to lead... the strong-willed hero he once was or the new dark-minded villain that he is becoming. Little does Peter know the black substance has its sights set on somebody else as well, a rival Bugle photographer, and a troubled young man, by the name of Eddie Brock, turning Brock into Venom, a foe Spider-man may be unable to stop.

NANCY DREW In Theaters: May 15, 2007 Rated PG See the Trailer

If you’ve grown up in the last few decades then you’ve no doubt heard of the Nancy Drew books. Young Nancy goes to California with her Daddy and finds herself smack dab in the middle of an unsolved mystery. Go figure. A girl power movie, it would be a great way to get young girls into reading.

DAY WATCH
In Theaters: June 1, 2007
Not Yet Rated
See the Trailer

This is the second film of a Russian horror/fantasy trilogy that began with NIGHT WATCH, which was a hit in the former Soviet Union. Forces of light and darkness come to blows after centuries-long truce. If you like horrors and underground films, then this second installment should be right up your alley.

HARRY POTTER AND THE ORDER OF THE PHOENIX
In Theaters: July 13, 2007
Not Yet Rated
See the Trailer

Everyone knows this film is coming out. What else is there to say? If you are a fan of the series, then you have already read it and know what’s going to happen. If you haven’t read the books but have watched the movies, you have probably picked up on the fact that Harry is growing older and his world is becoming ever-darker. That was a good move by J.K. Rowling and gives the character real life. This will be the darkest of the movies so far, so beware and have fun.

THE SIMPSONS MOVIE In Theaters: July 27, 2007 Not Yet Rated See the Trailer

The Simpsons finally made it to the big screen. Will this mark the end of the franchise or will it propel them to a new level? Only time will tell. As a Simpsons lover, I am hoping that it is great.

UNDERDOG

In Theaters: August 3, 2007
Not Yet Rated See the Trailer

From the Apple trailer site: “After an accident in the mysterious lab of maniacal scientist Dr. Simon Barsinister (PETER DINKLAGE), an ordinary beagle unexpectedly finds himself with unimaginable powers and the ability to speak. Armed with a fetching superhero costume, UNDERDOG (voiced by comedian JASON LEE) vows to protect the beleaguered citizens of Capitol City and, in particular, one beautiful spaniel named Polly Purebread (voiced by Academy Award nominee AMY ADAMS). When a sinister plot by Barsinister and his overgrown henchman Cad (PATRICK WARBURTON) threatens to destroy Capitol City only UNDERDOG can save the day.”

This is a live action film with cgi. I don’t know what to make of it, but the kids will probably dig it. It can surely lead to a good introduction of the old cartoon to a younger crowd.